Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Steady State

What does this mean?

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

The Path Forward

The Stewardship

Focuses on long-term sustainability and gentle cultivation of existing resources rather than forced expansion. It honors the organization's established role as a reliable anchor.

The Stewardship
The Stewardship
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Steady State ↓
Overall
25
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 Hidden Hidden — 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 Hidden Hidden — 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 — — — 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 — — — 43 Fragile Recovery
2014 — — — 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 — — — 37 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 — — — 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 — — — 43 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
SHIRLEY GREEN Board Member —
JAMES L WILLIAMS CHAIRMAN —
VERNITA HOLMES Board President —
JAYZIENITA HOPKINS Secretary —
COSBY MORTON Treasurer —
GLADYS HARDAWAY Board Member —
EDWARD WILLIAMS Treasurer —
SHERELL GUICHARD-THOMAS MEDIA COMUNICATIONS —
LACARL RICHARDSON Board Member —
JANICE WILLIAMS Secretary —

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
SHIRLEY GREEN Board Member —
JAMES L WILLIAMS CHAIRMAN —
VERNITA HOLMES Board President —
JAYZENITA HOPKINS Secretary —
COSBY MORTON Treasurer —
GLADYS HARDAWAY Board Member —
EDWARD WILLIAMS Treasurer —
SHERELL GUICHARD-THOMAS MEDIA COMMUNCATIONS —
LACARL RICHARDSON Board Member —
JANICE WILLIAMS Secretary —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
25 / 100
Priority Review

The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →

Peer comparison

Compared to 484 other orgs in TX with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 67 points below the peer median (0 vs. 67).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).

Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.